Sherwood R-972 User Thread - Page 16 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #451 of 3212 Old 01-28-2010, 07:53 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kal Rubinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC + Connecticut
Posts: 28,399
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by scott911 View Post

mr. rubinson: do you have any suggestions for dealing with a listening environment in which the seating position is literally against a back wall? I was drawn toward the concept of non-mono pole speakers as it's been suggested that those models can help in those situations...

I think it depends on whether this is for music or HT. In one of my systems, the couch is up against the back wall and I use monopole(!) speakers angled sharply to aim at the LP. I am not sure this would be ideal for HT. Perhaps others will comment.

Kal Rubinson

"Music in the Round"
Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile
http://www.stereophile.com/category/music-round

Kal Rubinson is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #452 of 3212 Old 01-28-2010, 09:16 PM
Senior Member
 
bighifi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Louisville, ky
Posts: 342
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
monopole's aimed above your head will work just fine, but another trick is to put them near the floor and aim them up at an angle. Also in ceiling speakers work great for this situation. I had to live with this same setup for a long time when I lived in military housing.

If I agree with you then we will both be wrong
bighifi is offline  
post #453 of 3212 Old 01-29-2010, 07:16 AM
 
cybrsage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 8,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

The front and rear radiations from a dipole are out of phase. Imagine a single speaker without an enclosure. As the cone moves forward to pressurize its frontal output, the rear output is showing a de-pressurization. Thus, front and rear are 180deg out of phase (polarity).

A bipole has, at least, two drivers wired such that each is pushing outward at the same time and, thus, the front and rear outputs are in phase.

Cannot tell unless I know how it is wired up. Many such speakers have a switch allowing them to be bipole or dipole according to the setting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scott911 View Post

and to add to Kal's comments.

Di-pole is often used on the more typical (and recommended) side wall surround position in a 5.1 set up.

Bi-pole is often used on a backwall in a 5.1 set up and is said to allow for a more forgiving and less directional surround effect when you have to use this compromised speaker placement due to you room, your wife , etc...

I emailed Paradigm and they said they are di-poles. I use them for the left and right side surrounds in my 6.1 system. Yeah for me that I am using them in the right location!

Thanks!

EDIT: I did find this:

Quote:


None of Paradigm's ADP speakers are truly dipole though. The crossover is tweaked such that, at midrange and treble frequencies, the two sides are out of phase, but by the time you get down to the upper bass region, the drivers are in phase and the output of the two dissimilar acoustic suspensions is complementary (or so we are told).

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volum...rs-9-2002.html

Interesting.



Sorry for the OT, I will stop now.
cybrsage is offline  
post #454 of 3212 Old 01-29-2010, 07:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Doug Blackburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Francisco - East Bay area
Posts: 3,453
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

I think it depends on whether this is for music or HT. In one of my systems, the couch is up against the back wall and I use monopole(!) speakers angled sharply to aim at the LP. I am not sure this would be ideal for HT. Perhaps others will comment.


When the room is large enough to place surround speakers behind the listener to some degree, monopole speakers make the most sense because modern 5.1 and 7.1 movie soundtracks are discrete - each channel is unique. Doing anything that de-localizes the channel damages the localization built-in to the soundtrack.

I'm not sure how I'd handle a smaller room with little or no space behind the listener, I've never had to deal with one. A dipole experiment would be worthwhile if monopole speakers seemed too overwhelming (or if monopoles would be closer than 5 feet for a 2-way bookshelf-size speaker - sitting so close to a speaker that the drivers haven't had a chance to blend into a cohesive soundfield is not good).

The whole diffuse-soundfield thinking came from the days (long-long ago) when surround sound was matrix with no directionality. It made sense then, it makes absolutely NO sense now in the age of discrete 5.1 and 7.1 soundtracks... unless you have that cramped-room issue. Maybe there's a use for them in that circumstance.

"Movies is magic..." Van Dyke Parks
THX Certified Professional Video Calibration
ISF -- HAA -- www.dBtheatrical.com
Widescreen Review -- Home Theater & Sound
Doug Blackburn is offline  
post #455 of 3212 Old 01-29-2010, 08:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 6,521
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 136 Post(s)
Liked: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn View Post

When the room is large enough to place surround speakers behind the listener to some degree, monopole speakers make the most sense because modern 5.1 and 7.1 movie soundtracks are discrete - each channel is unique. Doing anything that de-localizes the channel damages the localization built-in to the soundtrack.

The whole diffuse-soundfield thinking came from the days (long-long ago) when surround sound was matrix with no directionality.

I have to disagree.

Discrete vs. matrix has nothing to do with it...

Films are mixed using an array of speakers for the surrounds, hence the reason dipoles make sense.

The localization in a sound track is a result of mixing on an array system, and not specifically being built into the track.
FilmMixer is offline  
post #456 of 3212 Old 01-29-2010, 09:04 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kal Rubinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC + Connecticut
Posts: 28,399
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post

I have to disagree.

Discrete vs. matrix has nothing to do with it...

Films are mixed using an array of speakers for the surrounds, hence the reason dipoles make sense.

The localization in a sound track is a result of mixing on an array system, and not specifically being built into the track.

Note that issue is quite different for music discs.

Kal Rubinson

"Music in the Round"
Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile
http://www.stereophile.com/category/music-round

Kal Rubinson is online now  
post #457 of 3212 Old 01-29-2010, 09:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Selden Ball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 6,442
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

Note that issue is quite different for music discs.

This is, of course, the wrong thread for discussing speaker positioning. Nonetheless, Kal, I'm wondering what factors you're considering with "music discs," since they vary from monaural and stereo to discrete multichannel recordings, with mixes varying from traditional staging, with the performers in front, to ones with the performers surrounding the listener.

Selden
Selden Ball is online now  
post #458 of 3212 Old 01-29-2010, 02:56 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kal Rubinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC + Connecticut
Posts: 28,399
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selden Ball View Post

This is, of course, the wrong thread for discussing speaker positioning. Nonetheless, Kal, I'm wondering what factors you're considering with "music discs," since they vary from monaural and stereo to discrete multichannel recordings, with mixes varying from traditional staging, with the performers in front, to ones with the performers surrounding the listener.

Only relevant for discrete multichannel.

Kal Rubinson

"Music in the Round"
Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile
http://www.stereophile.com/category/music-round

Kal Rubinson is online now  
post #459 of 3212 Old 01-30-2010, 06:08 AM
Member
 
dkaleita's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 49
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by scott911 View Post

and to add to Kal's comments.

Di-pole is often used on the more typical (and recommended) side wall surround position in a 5.1 set up.

Bi-pole is often used on a backwall in a 5.1 set up and is said to allow for a more forgiving and less directional surround effect when you have to use this compromised speaker placement due to you room, your wife , etc...

The point is that bipoles and dipoles are NOT recommended for discrete music surround application, nor for use with ambisonics (or Trinnov). Yes, Jeff reported that Trinnov will properly locate a bipole surround speaker during calibration and that it sounds good during listening, But that doesn't mean it will be optimal. It won't be.

If you already own these types of speakers, Trinnov should make your setup sound better than it would without it. But if you are in the market for new speakers, and want your system to sound the best that it can with Trinnov and discrete surround MUSIC playback like multichannel SACD or DVD-Audio, monopoles (ideally equally matched all around) are recommended. This has been DTS' recommendation all along for home theatres.

Dave K.
dkaleita is offline  
post #460 of 3212 Old 01-30-2010, 10:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Doug Blackburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Francisco - East Bay area
Posts: 3,453
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post

I have to disagree.

Discrete vs. matrix has nothing to do with it...

Films are mixed using an array of speakers for the surrounds, hence the reason dipoles make sense.

The localization in a sound track is a result of mixing on an array system, and not specifically being built into the track.

Home systems never have an "array" of surround speakers. Home movie soundtacks should NEVER have the same mix as a theatrical mix - and I've never seen anything that claims the theatrical mix is transferred to Blu-ray disc without being remixed for home use.

When someone bumps something behind me and to my left, I don't want that sound growing HUGE and non-localized (neither would the engineer responsible for the home theater mix). Things can be done in home systems that are not practical for a large theater auditorium and I find many examples in many Blu-ray movies where the home experience is better than the theatrical experience because of superior localization in the home presentation.

"Movies is magic..." Van Dyke Parks
THX Certified Professional Video Calibration
ISF -- HAA -- www.dBtheatrical.com
Widescreen Review -- Home Theater & Sound
Doug Blackburn is offline  
post #461 of 3212 Old 01-30-2010, 12:26 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,349
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 133
"When someone bumps something behind me and to my left, I don't want that sound growing HUGE and non-localized"

I think it's a compromise depending on whether the effect is discrete or ambient - do you want the sound of rainfall to be localized to the surrounds?

Noah
noah katz is offline  
post #462 of 3212 Old 01-30-2010, 02:58 PM
Member
 
dkaleita's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 49
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

I think it's a compromise depending on whether the effect is discrete or ambient - do you want the sound of rainfall to be localized to the surrounds?

If the rainfall was recorded in surround, I'd want it reproduced with the proper imaging all around. In other words, I want to be able to discern the accurate localization of individual raindrops. Yes, this is very difficult and may not be possible to do perfectly. But it is is not possible at all if you're using theatre-like speaker arrays or bipoles or dipoles on the sides and rear that totally smear the image.

I consider optimizing your surround playback setup for correct reproduction of surround music recordings analogous to optimizing your home computer for gaming.

Dave K.
dkaleita is offline  
post #463 of 3212 Old 01-30-2010, 03:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RoboRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkaleita View Post

If the rainfall was recorded in surround, I'd want it reproduced with the proper imaging all around. In other words, I want to be able to discern the accurate localization of individual raindrops.

Boy, remind me not to apply for a sound-mixing job at your studio!
RoboRay is offline  
post #464 of 3212 Old 01-30-2010, 03:48 PM
Member
 
dkaleita's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 49
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
It's not as far-fetched as it sounds, RoboRay! Have you ever listened to a recording made with a Soundfield microphone and then reproduced through a properly set up Ambisonic system? If you sit in the sweet spot, you can indeed localize the sound of individual raindrops all around. This is the type of surround realism we should all be striving for.
dkaleita is offline  
post #465 of 3212 Old 01-30-2010, 08:15 PM
 
cybrsage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 8,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkaleita View Post

It's not as far-fetched as it sounds, RoboRay! Have you ever listened to a recording made with a Soundfield microphone and then reproduced through a properly set up Ambisonic system? If you sit in the sweet spot, you can indeed localize the sound of individual raindrops all around. This is the type of surround realism we should all be striving for.

But what about all the other listeners who are not in the sweet spot? What about in a real person's home?

Not saying that to be a jerk or anything, just tossing in the real world a bit.
cybrsage is offline  
post #466 of 3212 Old 01-30-2010, 08:17 PM
Senior Member
 
bighifi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Louisville, ky
Posts: 342
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
One of the best home theaters I ever heard was a THX theater that had THX approved speakers, gear and room treatment all the way around. It had the THX dipoles in the back. It did a great job of capturing the array in the cinema.

I have been very happy with sound Trinnov adds to my room. Is it the way the director intended? Well people throw that around a lot, but since I have not talked to the director, nor has he been in my room, I don't know. I do think the amount of spatial detail that Trinnov adds to my room has been a real pleasure. I know the purest in me will find some complaints, but as far a pure audio immersion, the Trinnov nails it.

If I agree with you then we will both be wrong
bighifi is offline  
post #467 of 3212 Old 01-30-2010, 08:26 PM
Member
 
dkaleita's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 49
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by cybrsage View Post

But what about all the other listeners who are not in the sweet spot? What about in a real person's home?

Not saying that to be a jerk or anything, just tossing in the real world a bit.

Now we're getting WAY off topic here.

All I can say is that matching monopole speakers all around, when used with the Trinnov process, degrades gracefully over a very wide area as you move progressively further from the sweet spot.

Don't take my word for it- go give it a listen.
dkaleita is offline  
post #468 of 3212 Old 01-30-2010, 09:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 6,521
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 136 Post(s)
Liked: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn View Post

Home systems never have an "array" of surround speakers.

That was my point...

I know that most home systems don't have an array.. that is what the dipoles can simulate..

Quote:


Home movie soundtacks should NEVER have the same mix as a theatrical mix - and I've never seen anything that claims the theatrical mix is transferred to Blu-ray disc without being remixed for home use.

Strong words, but I'll make the claim for you then...

Of all the films I mixed that were released on Blu Ray in 2009, none of them were remastered for home theater... I'd say for an average of every ten I mix, 1 or 2 are remastered for the home (I'd say closer to 1.)

As you are a "reviewer," I'm surprised you don't understand the process.... if you ever want to do an in depth story on how films are mixed and the journey they take to your home theater, I'd love to help.

Quote:


When someone bumps something behind me and to my left, I don't want that sound growing HUGE and non-localized (neither would the engineer responsible for the home theater mix). Things can be done in home systems that are not practical for a large theater auditorium and I find many examples in many Blu-ray movies where the home experience is better than the theatrical experience because of superior localization in the home presentation.

If you've never heard the track in a proper environment, you really have no reference as to what it's supposed to sound like.

While I agree that you may prefer the way it sounds in a home environment, I would be willing to wager that in a proper theatrical mixing or cinema environment, the experience would be amazing for you (which I attribute, in part, to the use of full range speakers with bi or tri amplified power, properly built and acoustically treated rooms, no bass management, and the use of multiple time aligned subs (I have 12 18" subs on my stage.)
FilmMixer is offline  
post #469 of 3212 Old 01-31-2010, 05:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Selden Ball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 6,442
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn View Post

Home movie soundtacks should NEVER have the same mix as a theatrical mix - and I've never seen anything that claims the theatrical mix is transferred to Blu-ray disc without being remixed for home use.

On the contrary,
I've never seen anything which claims that a theatrical audio mix is remixed for home use. In fact, that lack of remix is why THX EQ exists: to roll off the high-frequency gain needed for theatrical audio mixes which is inappropriate for home use.

Can you supply a reference which describes any audio remix done for home movie releases?

Selden
Selden Ball is online now  
post #470 of 3212 Old 01-31-2010, 09:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 6,521
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 136 Post(s)
Liked: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selden Ball View Post

On the contrary,
I've never seen anything which claims that a theatrical audio mix is remixed for home use. In fact, that lack of remix is why THX EQ exists: to roll off the high-frequency gain needed for theatrical audio mixes which is inappropriate for home use.

Can you supply a reference which describes any audio remix done for home movie releases?

To be clear, there are quite a few studios that remaster (the term re-mix implies a change in the content of the mix, and not a re-purposing, so it's not the technically correct term for what we are discussing, even though I am guilty of using it in converation.)

Sony and Disney spend the time and money to do it on almost all of their "A" features.

Liongate also continues to do it, as well as up-mixing to 7.1.

While ReEQ helps compensate for the lack of an x-curve EQ in most home setups, I find it is less of a necessity today as a lot of the high end sizzle that existed when films from the 80's and 90's made their way to video existed due to mastering on 35mm analog mag, sound systems that weren't as revealing or as accurate as today, the changes in mixing styles and the familiarity of mixing in 5.1.
FilmMixer is offline  
post #471 of 3212 Old 01-31-2010, 10:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Selden Ball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 6,442
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 325
FilmMixer,

Thanks for the clarification!

Selden
Selden Ball is online now  
post #472 of 3212 Old 01-31-2010, 10:25 AM
Member
 
Felder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 26
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
While I find the speaker location discussion interesting, can we try to keep it on topic with Trinnov and the R-972 only. Really interested in hearing folks continued observations with using the R-972, quality of sound, quality of Trinnov setup, types of speakers used, etc.

FilmMixer - have you heard the R-972 and Trinnov in a home environment? Just curious what your "ears on" observations are. Thx.
Felder is offline  
post #473 of 3212 Old 01-31-2010, 12:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
FilmMixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Los Angeles Area, CA. USA
Posts: 6,521
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 136 Post(s)
Liked: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felder View Post

While I find the speaker location discussion interesting, can we try to keep it on topic with Trinnov and the R-972 only. Really interested in hearing folks continued observations with using the R-972, quality of sound, quality of Trinnov setup, types of speakers used, etc.

FilmMixer - have you heard the R-972 and Trinnov in a home environment? Just curious what your "ears on" observations are. Thx.

Yes.. I have one in my system right now.

I'm a little rushed at the moment (got a last minute invitation to a little music awards show that's being held tonight) but will say the receiver without Trinnov is one of the best I've ever had in my system (in fact, only on par with the Pioneer SC-09...)

With Trinnnov, it's taken to another level... it really sounds amazing, and the amp section is dead quiet, and powerful.. don't let the 100W rating fool you... it sounds authoritative and offers up plenty of slam.

When I have some time this week, I will give a more detailed account...

I have some minor issues that Jeff is working on... I'll let you all know how things are progressing..
FilmMixer is offline  
post #474 of 3212 Old 01-31-2010, 01:57 PM
Senior Member
 
bighifi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Louisville, ky
Posts: 342
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
FilmMixer what firmware do you have? I was thinking about going down to the previous firmware to see if things get more stable.

If I agree with you then we will both be wrong
bighifi is offline  
post #475 of 3212 Old 01-31-2010, 03:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Doug Blackburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Francisco - East Bay area
Posts: 3,453
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

"When someone bumps something behind me and to my left, I don't want that sound growing HUGE and non-localized"

I think it's a compromise depending on whether the effect is discrete or ambient - do you want the sound of rainfall to be localized to the surrounds?

That all depends on what the context of the rainfall is. If the context is that there is a window open in the room to the left rear and the sound of the rain is coming into the room only through that window, it should SOUND like it is only coming into the room through that window.

If the scene is outside and it's raining all around, obviously the rain sound should appear in all speakers relatively equally to produce an ambient sound. Ambient sounds are NOT rear-channel only. And if you think it requires some sort of diffuse rear speaker to produce a diffuse ambient soundfield, you really need to go back and see what is possible with a single stereo pair of speakers - which are quite able to completely disappear and throw a HUGE non-localized soundfield if the speakers are good, the electronics feeding them are good, and the recording is done properly/appropriately to achieve that effect, that's exactly what you get in your listening room from monopole speakers. In addition, monopole speakers all the way around in a surround system are fully capable of imaging (localizing) sounds between any pair of speakers. And sending an ambient sound intentionally out of phase to monopole speakers absolutely produces a large diffuse field. And recording engineers KNOW THIS. It is one of the tools they use when mastering soundtracks for home or theaters. It is QUITE easy to make a monopole surround array do ANYTHING a dipole array can do - it just takes 2 or more speakers rather than a single speakerl. But you absolutely CANNOT make dipole surrounds image like monopole surrounds (assuming they are the THX type speaker that is supposed to fire forward and rearward along the wall and not towards the listener except whatever heads that way very far off-axis or from reflections). If the room is large enough to support monopole surrounds tht is IMO, the only right choice for a serious home theater setup. The room has to be about 18 feet deep and the listening seats have to be maybe 10 feet from the front wall and 8 feet from the back wall. Width would probably have to be at least 13-13.5 feet but 14 feet or more would be better. If the room is smaller than that, getting a discrete surround array get's more difficult. You would be looking at physically smaller speakers or perhaps coaxial drivers or sub-optimal mounting (in-ceiling or in-wall). And at some point if your room is really small, dipole surrounds may be the only option to keep from overwhelming the listener by being too close to the speakers for comfort. There could be other extenuating circumstances also... like a miniature theater layout with several rows of seats and the owner isn't interested in an optimized single listening/viewing seat but demands at least "good" sound in every seat at the expense of not having a single "ultimate experience" seat in the theater.

"Movies is magic..." Van Dyke Parks
THX Certified Professional Video Calibration
ISF -- HAA -- www.dBtheatrical.com
Widescreen Review -- Home Theater & Sound
Doug Blackburn is offline  
post #476 of 3212 Old 01-31-2010, 03:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Doug Blackburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Francisco - East Bay area
Posts: 3,453
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by cybrsage View Post

But what about all the other listeners who are not in the sweet spot? What about in a real person's home?

Not saying that to be a jerk or anything, just tossing in the real world a bit.

In every single "real person's" home I've been in to do a calibration there have only been 2 different scenarios:

1) Nobody cares about the sound and the TV speakers are the only souind or there are some small on-wall or "decorator inspired" in-wall speakers in use.

2) The system's owner cares about the sound and wants a good listening experience and nobody else in the house could give a crap as long as they can hear the dialog and the suspenseful music and explosions are audible.

Frankly, I've never seen a system where the owner was interested in and knowledgeable about surround sound where he was willing to make the primary seat less good so the seats in other rows were not quite as bad.

"Movies is magic..." Van Dyke Parks
THX Certified Professional Video Calibration
ISF -- HAA -- www.dBtheatrical.com
Widescreen Review -- Home Theater & Sound
Doug Blackburn is offline  
post #477 of 3212 Old 01-31-2010, 03:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Doug Blackburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Francisco - East Bay area
Posts: 3,453
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by bighifi View Post

One of the best home theaters I ever heard was a THX theater that had THX approved speakers, gear and room treatment all the way around. It had the THX dipoles in the back. It did a great job of capturing the array in the cinema.

This sort of approach comes from the premise that the movie theater is the ultimate reference. I say that is B-A-L-O-N-E-Y. We can do MUCH better than movie theater sound at home. There's not a theater I've been in that sounds as good as my system at home - not even a good IMAX venue. They have many compromises in the theater that I don't have to deal with... I don't have to put my center channel speaker behind a movie screen. I don't have to spread my side surround channels across 40 feet or more. I don't have to deal with long reverb times and I don't have to run high-efficiency ultra-high SPL-capable speakers so I don't have the limits theater systems have. And making a movie soundtrack that is intentionally mixed for 5.1 or 7.1 discrete channels in a home system try to sound like what you hear in a movie theater auditorium is akin to thinking your CAR is a better CAR if it drives like a 40-foot RV rather than being more responsive and efficient than a 40-foot RV. We have a GIFT in that we can make our home theater systems audio experience BETTER than what we get in a movie theater. The recording engineers have to make lots of compromises for theatrical mixes - but they can remove the compromises for the Blu-ray disc.

Our ultimate reference is or should be something considerably better than what is experienced in a movie theater. And that is certainly achievable... but not with dipole surrounds (if the room is large enough to not require dipole surrounds).

"Movies is magic..." Van Dyke Parks
THX Certified Professional Video Calibration
ISF -- HAA -- www.dBtheatrical.com
Widescreen Review -- Home Theater & Sound
Doug Blackburn is offline  
post #478 of 3212 Old 01-31-2010, 03:41 PM
Member
 
scott911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 189
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post

(got a last minute invitation to a little music awards show that's being held tonight)

Yo Baby! I'll be look'n for ya on the red carpet!
scott911 is offline  
post #479 of 3212 Old 01-31-2010, 03:59 PM
Member
 
scott911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 189
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felder View Post

While I find the speaker location discussion interesting, can we try to keep it on topic with Trinnov and the R-972 only. .

The trinnov / r-972 seems to be something that may change the dynamic of speaker type in a particular setting. I appreciate the very well articulated arguements presented here.

I'm a user who is looking at this reciever very much because I have a less than ideal room - with couch pushed up against back wall. Hand in hand with that limitatio, is my interest in bi-pole and di-pole speakers because they are thought to be able to help deal with that situation as well.

I have alot to think about - thanks!
scott911 is offline  
post #480 of 3212 Old 01-31-2010, 05:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Doug Blackburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Francisco - East Bay area
Posts: 3,453
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post

If you've never heard the track in a proper environment, you really have no reference as to what it's supposed to sound like.

The PROPER environment is a home theater setup... with 5.1 or 7.1 speakers roughly circling the listening position, roughly with equal angles between each speaker. The speakers would almost always be single-amped and there would almost always be 1 subwoofer. If you aren't mixing on a high quality system of that type, you aren't mixing for your audience... the people who spend money on the disc. And an AVR would probably drive the entire system, not banks of high-powered amps.

I use a system that's fairly decent... there are 5 subwoofers, for example. Not to make the bass louder, but to make the bass better in a home-size theater room. I have some room treatment also - but this is very rare in typical home theater systems.

Saying your tri-amped acoustically treated "stage" system is the ultimate reference is elite-ist - and it's an approach I've not been happy about... ever. How can you know what something is going to sound like to the home theater audience if the system you use for reference is FAR removed from home theater systems as people are taught to setup in documentation provided by Dolby Labs, DTS, AVR manufacturers, and surround sound processor manufactrurers?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmMixer View Post

While I agree that you may prefer the way it sounds in a home environment, I would be willing to wager that in a proper theatrical mixing or cinema environment, the experience would be amazing for you (which I attribute, in part, to the use of full range speakers with bi or tri amplified power, properly built and acoustically treated rooms, no bass management, and the use of multiple time aligned subs (I have 12 18" subs on my stage.)

Why don't you spend more time making the experience AMAZING for me in a REAL home theater system? And not on your "stage" --- which doesn't seem to be even remotely similar to home theater systems used by the typical home enthusiast? Dolby and DTs are documenting what people are supposed to be doing re. setting up their home theater systems. AVR and surround processor manufacturers pretty much parrot the Dolby and DTS information... yet I keep hearing descriptions of mixing reference systems that are not remotely like the systems people are instructed to be using at home. I would argue your room and your system is NOT the ultimate reference. The ultimate reference is what customers are using in their homes - or something closely related to it. If you spend an hour making sure some specific sound is at just the right level, but people at home with a 100w/ch AVR and single-wired 89 dB/watt efficient speakers and a single subwoofer, can't hear that sound you put at "just the right level" on your "stage" system... who is right and who is wrong? You may have the sound at just the right level in your reference... but nobody is going to duplicate your system in their home. So the real reference is what people are (or are likely to) hear at home.

Just estimating, I'd say there are maybe 2 or 3 theaters in the whole country that have sound systems even CLOSE to the capabilities of your mixing stage system... and all of those theaters are in the LA area. Most people are stuck going to multiplexes where the speakers and amplifiers aren't very good and certainly have nowhere near the linearity or resolving power of your mixing stage. You can't be certain of how the mix will sound in the typical multiplex unless you HEAR it in a multiplex environment with the same quality of speakers and amplification commonly used.

So you are in this isolated "bubble of perfection" turining out soundtracks that sound awesome within that "bubble of perfection" but there's no "proof of concept" - nobody checks to see if the sound in a typical theater is what it should be and nobody checks to see if the sound in a typical home theater is what it should be.

Widescreen Review has done several features on movie sound and in all cases there were differences cited between work on theatrical and home soundtracks. I'm a bit dismayed to hear your experience is different. It makes little difference to me if the theatrical soundtrack becomes the home soundtrack if the movie is the typical romantic comedy or documentary, or even most dramas. But when the soundtrack becomes an essential part of the movie experience, it deserves better than simply being transferred over for the home release... action movies, s-f, thrillers, fantasy flicks, some of the better horror flicks... those deserve more than a straight transfer.

Rather than criticizing what people are listening to at home as not being the ultimate reference, seems to me it would make more sense for home theater mixing to be done on the sort of system being used in homes so things that are supposed to be audible can be confirmed to be audible at the proper levels and localized properly in the home environment. And that should be aimed at making the HOME listening experience amazing. Being focused on how amazing your untypical-of-home-systems mixing system sounds seems to make it impossible or improbable that anyone would ever hear what you hear in their home system. That's not the right goal for soundtracks on home formats... my opinion of course. But it seems like a reasonable and logical opinion. I understand the need for micro-resolution in some aspects of music and movie mastering - but there should always be a more reasonable reference... a system or systems more representative of what the final product is going to be heard on. Both have to be used together to achieve a result that gives the home audience the ultimate experience even if they don't have an acoustically treated, tri-amped, 12 subwoofer system. My guess would be that home listeners are not listening at levels as loud as you use ("reference level"
seems about 5-6 dB too loud in my home system - I end up fatigued after an hour of movie soundtrack at reference level). That adjustment alone could make a HUGE difference in the balance of a soundtrack for home release. That sound that's audible, but just barely when the system is at reference level, could end up below the threshold of being noticed in many home systems because most people are probably listening 4 to 10 dB below reference level. That's just one example of adjustments that are appropriate for a home audience IMO, of course. I understand you may be instructed to simply transfer the theatrical soundtrack because there's no money budgeted to remix for the home release, and that's probably a no-harm-no-foul situation in movies where the soundtrack is nothing special (like (500) Days Of Summer we watched last night - the soundtrack was fine, but nothing special and it didn't really need to be anything special). But if that happens on soundtracks that really matter... that would be really disappointing to hear.

"Movies is magic..." Van Dyke Parks
THX Certified Professional Video Calibration
ISF -- HAA -- www.dBtheatrical.com
Widescreen Review -- Home Theater & Sound
Doug Blackburn is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
Sherwood Newcastle R 972

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off